Linked by David Adams on Tue 6th Mar 2012 16:23 UTC
Legal If you run a web site or service that runs afoul of US law, and that site is hosted overseas, then the US legal system doesn't have much recourse, right? Wrong. Because the .com, .net, and .org top level domains are managed by a US company, the government can come to Verisign with a court order and seize your domain, effectively shutting you down. And because of a quirk of internet history that made the US-controlled domains the de-facto standard for web sites, this is a situation that's quite possibly permanent.
Order by: Score:
shotsman
Member since:
2005-07-22

They can't escape due to other US Laws that say that if you break a US law anywhere on this planet, we will come after you and send you to chokey for the rest of your natural.

Ok, I'm going a bit overboard but recent events have made me believe that there is 'No Hiding Place' from the Feds if they are really determined to come after you.

Reply Score: 4

Don't worry
by DFergATL on Tue 6th Mar 2012 17:53 UTC
DFergATL
Member since:
2006-02-09

Don't worry the US Government would never, ever abuse it's power. Just ask our citizens on how well we have used the "Patriot Act."

Reply Score: 11

v RE: Don't worry
by ilovebeer on Tue 6th Mar 2012 20:11 UTC in reply to "Don't worry"
RE[2]: Don't worry
by DFergATL on Tue 6th Mar 2012 20:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Don't worry"
DFergATL Member since:
2006-02-09

What I don't like about the "Patriot Act" is that it too broad and has very few checks and balances in it to keep it from being abused.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Don't worry
by TechGeek on Wed 7th Mar 2012 00:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Don't worry"
TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

Here are the facts of the Patriot Act: For the issue of delayed-notice warrants from 2006-2009, the patriot Act was used 1618 times for drug cases, 122 times for fraud cases, and 15 times for cases of terrorism. All the 9/11 attack did was take away our rights.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Don't worry
by trev on Wed 7th Mar 2012 04:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Don't worry"
trev Member since:
2006-11-22

Well any suspension of habeus corpus is clearly against the constitution. Letting any law that is so clearly unconstitutional stand SHOULD be a big issue for everyone. Otherwise you can just throw the whole idea of rule of law right out and just admit it is rule of the ultra-rich. Maybe that doesn't effect you though. I can't say.

Reply Score: 4

ggeldenhuys
Member since:
2006-11-13

Maybe I understood it wrong, but isn't decentralised domain names already available. As far as I understand, it is managed via the Namecoin project (a child project of Bitcoin).
<ul>
<li> Namecoin - A DNS alternative based on Bitcoin [ http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/2011/05/12/namecoin-a-dns-alternative-... ]
<li> Namecoin DNS Servers [ http://namecoin.bitcoin-contact.org/ ]
</ul>

Reply Score: 3

saidge@yahoo.com Member since:
2007-11-06

My understanding is that that is an alternate root-zone to the standard ICANN. There's been a few of those that have cropped up over the years.

I think 'decentralized' as it is put in this article is referring to a 'dynamic' domain, or one that doesn't depend on a specific tld or url to operate. I imagine something like wikileaks and its mirrors would be the closest example.

Reply Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Possibly, but its made by the same people as bitcoin. A huge red flag for me. Bitcoin is a noble idea that's economically naive about the effects of deflation. So what is this alternative DNS solution naive about?

Reply Score: 2

Out of the frying pan?
by daddio on Tue 6th Mar 2012 19:17 UTC
daddio
Member since:
2007-07-14

Its scary to see the US demonstrate its unworthiness to continue management of the root servers, because I agree that a handoff to the UN would be worse, with strong russian, chinese, and other censorship-happy influences.

I hope I am wrong.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Out of the frying pan?
by CapEnt on Wed 7th Mar 2012 12:19 UTC in reply to "Out of the frying pan?"
CapEnt Member since:
2005-12-18

Even if root servers was internationally controlled, USA still could seize domains controlled by a company on American soil.

As long the US government keep itself away from the domains of other countries, i don't think that any government would care less. (They know that the first time they dare to touch a thirty party domain, it will be the last.)

If you buy a service from a company in USA, then you subject part of your business to the American law. Just because its so easy to get American services overseas, it does not mean that the service itself is a international resource except from American law.

By the end of day, authoritarian countries already filter their DNS servers, and their local domain controllers are subject to heavy censorship, including background checks of anyone buying a domain. What we should try is to prevent USA itself to become a authoritarian regime.

Thus, the only way to be sure that your business do not fall in some stupid grey area of American law, is to rely on the local services of your country, or of a country that is legal to do whatever you want to. If you are using the internet for political purposes, then you should go after a country that is sympathetic with your pleas.

Its pretty sad to know that we don't have a country with the mighty of USA to actually stand as the perfect freedom outpost of the world. But as imperfect as the US government is, there is far worse countries out there.

Of course, if you rely on USA services just because your local services sucks, i'm sorry for you.

Reply Score: 3

v Why do you keep sticking up for scum?
by jefro on Tue 6th Mar 2012 20:36 UTC
D'oh!
by marcp on Tue 6th Mar 2012 21:15 UTC
marcp
Member since:
2007-11-23

What people need is the MESH NETWORKING, independent and free from official internet.

I'm waiting eagerly for The Freedom Box to come. I hope it will give control back into our hands.

For now we can host our own things locally and use other domains, as TK and many more available.

Reply Score: 4

reusing an old analogy
by tidux on Tue 6th Mar 2012 22:00 UTC
tidux
Member since:
2011-08-13

US control of the major TLDs and most of the root DNS servers is like democracy in general: the worst option except for all the other ones. All the international options suck, and I don't think there's a single country out there that a) isn't the US, b) won't kowtow to US requests anyway, and c) isn't more repressive than the US. Seriously, the short list of countries that routinely tell the US to go pound sand is like a who's who of crackpot dictatorships and oppressive regimes. Venezuela, North Korea, China, Russia, Iran...

Reply Score: 1

v Why is this wrong?
by Drathmere on Tue 6th Mar 2012 23:12 UTC
RE: Why is this wrong?
by Chrishas on Tue 6th Mar 2012 23:55 UTC in reply to "Why is this wrong?"
Chrishas Member since:
2012-02-27

Because .com does not represent the USA, it's short for commercial, what does a company based in the UK or Asia or wherever have to do with the US? Nothing, perhaps the US should just use it's own .us extension by default and create a new, better mechanism for handling .com in collaboration with the rest of the world. Maybe it's also time to use different extensions depending on the organisation/person registering a domain. CERN is also where www was developed, should it have exclusive rights over that?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Why is this wrong?
by Lennie on Tue 6th Mar 2012 23:57 UTC in reply to "Why is this wrong?"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Most people are not complaining about that .com .org and so on are under the US jurisdiction.

The problem is how they handle it:

http://www.osnews.com/story/25627/_US_government_is_scaring_web_bus...

And the problem seems to be getting worse.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Why is this wrong?
by Mellin on Wed 7th Mar 2012 10:58 UTC in reply to "Why is this wrong?"
Mellin Member since:
2005-07-06

that's wrong usa didn't fund everything that became internet

Reply Score: 4

RE: Why is this wrong?
by tristan on Thu 8th Mar 2012 12:02 UTC in reply to "Why is this wrong?"
tristan Member since:
2006-02-01

The US funded everything that became the internet.


I assume you posted this via OSNews's Usenet interface.

It turns out there's quite a popular service on the internet nowadays called the "World Wide Web". It was invented by an Englishman, working in Geneva for the European nuclear research agency.

You should give it a try some time, there's some quite good stuff on there.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Why is this wrong?
by tidux on Fri 9th Mar 2012 20:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Why is this wrong?"
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

Bah, stealing and/or taking credit for Europe's greatest stuff is practically a sport over here. Einstein? Yoink, worked at Princeton. Werner Von Braun? Yoink, helped start our space program. Timothy Berners Lee? Yoink, now an Ars Technica guy and member of the Cato Institute. Internetworking in general? Yoink.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Why is this wrong?
by ilovebeer on Sat 10th Mar 2012 21:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why is this wrong?"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

Bah, stealing and/or taking credit for Europe's greatest stuff is practically a sport over here. Einstein? Yoink, worked at Princeton. Werner Von Braun? Yoink, helped start our space program. Timothy Berners Lee? Yoink, now an Ars Technica guy and member of the Cato Institute. Internetworking in general? Yoink.

Since your post doesn't actually contain a valid point, what exactly are you claiming the US stole or is wrongfully taking credit for?

Reply Score: 2

ITU ? That would be a bad choice
by Lennie on Wed 7th Mar 2012 00:00 UTC
Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

At times people suggested ICANN be based in Switzerland and be declared it independant.

Although when you look at FIFA for example it might turn out to be a bad idea too ;-)

Reply Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

The question is not if it's bad or good but if it would be worse or better.

Reply Score: 3

Comment by andih
by andih on Wed 7th Mar 2012 00:10 UTC
andih
Member since:
2010-03-27

I use cesidian root, and Im very very happy with it.
faster than googles (from my location at least), and much more reliable than my isp's.

Syncs to icanns also, so never ever problems resolving things ;)

Reply Score: 2

Change your TLD
by Lorin on Wed 7th Mar 2012 00:21 UTC
Lorin
Member since:
2010-04-06

It is simple and would not do much to disrupt any business unless the US decides to blacklist domains, of course then they violate the Constitution.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Wed 7th Mar 2012 04:13 UTC
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

TechGeek, please list any example of how you've been directly affected by the Patriot Act.

Lorin, blacklisting domain names and the Constitution have absolutely nothing in common. I'm guessing you this is another case of someone thinking they have a right that doesn't actually exist.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by TechGeek on Thu 8th Mar 2012 17:51 UTC in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

TechGeek, please list any example of how you've been directly affected by the Patriot Act.

Lorin, blacklisting domain names and the Constitution have absolutely nothing in common. I'm guessing you this is another case of someone thinking they have a right that doesn't actually exist.


What the hell kind of reply is that? If the US was burning people at the stake, I shouldn't worry until they tie me to a pole? It's EVERY citizen's right and responsibility to speak out when our government does shitty things. Thats the whole point of a government by the people, for the people.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Fri 9th Mar 2012 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

TechGeek, please list any example of how you've been directly affected by the Patriot Act.

What the hell kind of reply is that? If the US was burning people at the stake, I shouldn't worry until they tie me to a pole? It's EVERY citizen's right and responsibility to speak out when our government does shitty things. Thats the whole point of a government by the people, for the people.

Ok, so you can't provide any examples. No problem, I didn't think you could. Trying to divert attention away by comparing it to burning people is a bit silly. We can stay on topic -- we're talking about the Patriot Act, not burning people. They are not comparable.

We have a government by the people, sure... But, we do not have a government for the people and if you're unclear about that at this point then you've got a hell of a LOT of catching up to do.

Reply Score: 2

time to
by Mellin on Wed 7th Mar 2012 10:52 UTC
Mellin
Member since:
2005-07-06

time to abandon those domains and stop using us companies

Reply Score: 3

USA PATRIOT Act, Title IX
by _QJ_ on Wed 7th Mar 2012 14:14 UTC
_QJ_
Member since:
2009-03-12

Yes really, we should _all_ do this title IX:

... "Improve Intelligence"

O:-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root

Edited 2012-03-07 14:18 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Really?
by mistersoft on Wed 7th Mar 2012 16:07 UTC
mistersoft
Member since:
2011-01-05

Let's hope it does come to that!

A decentralized internet and DNS system would be GREAT thing!

p2p all the way!

Even if most traffic doesn't end up being p2p shuffled, the OPTION would be great. So a fall back is always there!

Reply Score: 2

Comment by demetrioussharpe
by demetrioussharpe on Fri 9th Mar 2012 16:54 UTC
demetrioussharpe
Member since:
2009-01-09

And of course, if the US or any other government ever overreaches on the domain name system, we can always create a new, decentralized one. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.


It's already come to that, we're just all a little too stupid to realize it. We're like fish who don't realize that they've been swallowed by a whale....until they're being digested!


P.S. Before some idiot tries to slam me for badmouthing the US, I'm a veteran who spent 14yrs in the US Army...I believe that I've earned my opinion.

Reply Score: 1